Bing shows results that MS asked Google to take down

You know this is one of those things that sounds terribly hypocritical but in a massive company can easily be just the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing. Its hard for me to see this as anything more then typical large co bureaucracy.

I've gotten several of these types of notices before. Usually, it isn't Microsoft that does them directly ("Internet1@microsoft-antipiracy.com"). For instance, the ones I've received as usually signed as "on behalf of Microsoft Corporation" with some third-party legal firm blindly handing these out.<p>So the fact that one hand doesn't know what the other is doing is probably quite accurate in this case.

Or maybe this company that sent the takedowns, Marketly (not MS, just someone with whom they have a contract), never sent takedowns to Bing. (Why is of course open to speculation; maybe Bing isn't popular enough to be worth the effort)

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that maybe MS is okay with Bing returning results, even pirate results that Google does not.<p>Maybe MS agrees with the Pirate mantra that piracy doesn't hurt, but help sales. What would happen if pirates, even casual pirates learned that Bing results weren't filtered but Google's were? I would suspect a massive uptake in usage if this was proven. And who are these pirates? They're the most geeky of your friends, the ones who influence and tutor the non-tech savvy about what tech products and services to use (Bing, Windows, Office etc.)<p>Crazy? Probably. But still fun to consider. Too bad MS is too big, slow and traditional to do something this radical.

Anyone else surprised that the use of "bitch" as a verb is suddenly acceptable journalism?

<i>Now, it seems pretty reasonable to assume that if Marketly is sending a takedown to Google to get such a link taken out of its search engine, on behalf of Microsoft, that it quite likely is issuing the same kind of takedown to Microsoft's Bing (hell, you'd perhaps think that Microsoft could just pull the link without a takedown).</i><p>I doubt that Microsoft is streamlined enough to allow different departments (Bing and whomever handles DMCAs) to effectively communicate. Microsoft is an immense bureaucracy.

MS hires a third party to police these SERPs. The third party does't send notices to Bing because they'd be threatening their own client! It's that simple.<p>Anything more would require additional effort and initiative and coordination between the contracting team, the contractor, and the Bing team. Probably someone just hired the third party, turned them loose and didn't put any more thought into it.

It seems surprising that Microsoft even owns copyright in the works that are claimed.<p>"Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Conviction" is apparently a Ubisoft product, which is a publicly traded company distinct from Microsoft.<p>Copyright in "Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga" is apparently held by LucasArts.<p>While they all appear to be Xbox 360 games, being a platform manufacturer doesn't usually mean you own the content produced for that platform. It is possible that the games linked against a Microsoft library, and are infringing against the Microsoft's rights in the library, but then the declaration needs to declare that "that the complaining party is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed" - which means that the allegation of what is being infringed (i.e. a library and not the entire work) should have matched the work Microsoft owned.

I don't even think it was Bing who asked for those links to be removed, it was actually the X-Box division trying to prevent piracy of games on their platform. If anything, Bing probably is much slower and less adept at being able to block these results when compared to Google hence the discrepancy.

Oh, come one people.<p>"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlons_razor" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlons_razor</a>

If we were to ascribe this to malice, MS achieves two things. First, those search results won't be available at least on one of the main search engines, and this has the effect of cutting the number of illegal downloads. Second, MS has just gotten some traffic to Bing --- MS sure won't be happy to see all those requests for Xbox game torrents, but now it has a little more control on them.

But what are they trying to gain? Users? For me, if I do not find a result on Google, search is over. I never try Bing!

Bing tracks everyone who clicks the links

wow that is some interesting corporate issues... Look our search engine is better it has so many more results... Which we believe to be illegal links and won't let any other search engines help you find... Bing, the best for your warez needs.

Its odd. Its either an over sight. Takedown lost in bureaucracy.<p>Or.. perhaps comically. This is a third party issueing takedowns on Microsofts behalf. Isn't submiting to Bing due to lack of market share?

Google send takedown requests to Bing for these same Microsoft links.

I am loving the takedown notice for the takedown notice.<p><a href="http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/requests/133649/" rel="nofollow">http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/removals/copyright/...</a><p>Perhaps this is the solution to the entire problem, trap the whole system in a recursive loop. Although then perhaps all the telephones in the world will ring until Douglas Hofstadter answers one of them.